Americans recognize the Chinese Communist Party as a serious threat to our country. But many corners of the federal government do not want to talk about Communist China. 

When they do acknowledge it, they censor themselves by relying on neutral (or ‘country agnostic’) strategies to avoid the elephant in the room: China is our most dangerous adversary and will use every tactic at its disposal to weaken America. 

The House Oversight Committee is demanding answers from federal agencies that do not – or will not – address the CCP threat head-on, sometimes because agencies themselves have succumbed to CCP influence methods. 

For decades, the CCP has waged an aggressive campaign intended to hobble America through political warfare, an insidious strategy to weaken our way of life without firing a shot. The committee’s government-wide investigation has brought federal agencies in to answer for their tepid responses and has found too much of the Washington bureaucracy is incapable or unwilling to address the CCP threat.

For example, the NASA administrator recently congratulated the CCP for obtaining the first samples of lunar rocks from the far side of the moon, gushing that the discovery was ‘an important step in humanity’s work to understand and explore the lunar surface.’ 

This statement demonstrates a profound naivety regarding China’s goals in space, which are inextricably intertwined with the CCP’s militaristic ambitions.  

Much of the American government seems to have forgotten that its purpose is to promote the interests of Americans. Indeed, the Space Race that prompted the creation of NASA would not have been a much of a race at all if American leaders at the time had heaped laurels upon an adversary that has named America its ‘chief enemy.’ 

America would not have won the first Cold War if our leaders refused to openly identify Soviet efforts to infiltrate and destroy America. 

Certain agencies have shown signs of life. The National Science Foundation (NSF) warned the committee that 90% of research security concerns involving all U.S. federally funded research originates in China. This kind of honest recognition of CCP political warfare should be emulated across the federal government. 

But even NSF continues to use ‘neutral’ approaches to counter this threat, hamstringing themselves from valuable China expertise in an attempt to not ruffle CCP feathers.

Similarly, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) told the committee that of 75% of the shipments it identified as high-risk last year, 83% had China as the country of origin. Yet CPSC rejected the committee’s suggestion the agency should warn American consumers about the unique dangers of Chinese-made products. 

CPSC should urge and help Americans discern when it is prudent to purchase goods manufactured in China. That is, after all, consistent with the entire purpose of its existence.

Federal agencies’ willful blindness to CCP political warfare – evident in leaders’ messaging about it and strategy to counter it – may be a function of CCP influence itself. The Department of Justice’s shuttering of the China Initiative in 2022 – after DOJ found no merit to charges that cases brought under the initiative were racially motivated – is an embarrassment to the sole agency responsible for enforcing our country’s national security laws. 

DOJ refuses to say whether it has investigated the origins of what it found to be unsubstantiated claims of racial bias in China Initiative cases. DOJ’s evasiveness is significant. 

DOJ acknowledges the CCP uses ‘wedge narratives’ that push racially divisive agendas intended to divide Americans from all backgrounds. But DOJ itself appears to have been influenced to stop prioritizing cases against the CCP.

There will be no ‘shot heard round the world’ in a war against the CCP. The creeping political warfare has already begun, and federal agencies must first acknowledge that we are in a new Cold War. 

The enemy is an authoritarian regime that, among other atrocities, enslaves its own people and has killed tens of thousands of Americans each year indirectly through its central role in the fentanyl crisis corroding our country, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. 

The DEA is one of the few agencies that seems willing to confront the CCP threat directly as it messages candidly about deadly fentanyl precursors originating in China, the role Chinese transnational criminal organizations play in trafficking, and China’s surpassing the Mexican cartels in money laundering.

Federal agencies must wake up to the CCP threat by engaging with and inspiring Americans to push back against infiltration and influence. 

The good news is that, in many ways, the American people are better prepared for the confrontation than their own government, because they have maintained what seems to have been lost in Washington, D.C.: pride in themselves and their country. The Oversight Committee expects no less from the American government.

Two of former President Trump’s top allies in the House of Representatives are in Atlanta on Wednesday to mobilize Black voters ahead of his November rematch with President Biden.

Reps. Wesley Hunt, R-Texas, and Byron Donalds, R-Fla., are hosting an event called ‘Congress, Cognac, and Cigars’ at a cigar lounge in the Peach State alongside former ESPN host Sage Steele.

An invitation to the event obtained by Fox News Digital billed it in all capital letters as ‘a real conversation about the Black male vote, leadership, and how they will impact the 2024 election.’

Hunt told Fox News Digital in an interview that Black voters, particularly in a state like Georgia, are going to be ‘paramount’ in deciding the winner of the next presidential race.

‘The thing is, in the past, the Republican Party has not done a very good job of going to these communities, articulating why our policies are in the best interest of the Black community,’ Hunt said. ‘Black issues are American issues. We just need voices to go articulate that.’

‘You don’t have to vote for Democrats anymore because your mama and your grandmother and your parents told you to do it. The Republican Party right now is in your best interest. If you hate what’s going on at the border, if you hate what’s happening with inflation, if you hate crime, I’m telling you that … electing [Trump] and getting him back in office is definitely going to be in your best interest.’

It’s part of a wider strategy for Trump to win 25% to 35% of the Black male vote, Hunt said. Black voters were critical to Biden’s 2020 Democrat primary and general election victories and will likely play a critical role in the fall race.

Multiple exit polls show Trump having won 19% of Black male voters in 2020, though the vast majority of Black voters still went for Biden.

‘That’s the highest that we’ve ever seen in modern history for a Republican president,’ Hunt said. ‘We need to add about five or six percentage points and grow from what we did four years ago. And given the environment that we’re in right now, we think we can accomplish that.’

Their first ‘Congress, Cognac, and Cigars’ event took place in Philadelphia. Hunt said the next one would be in Milwaukee, the site of next month’s Republican National Convention.

Hunt said the previous event showed him that Republicans could potentially make some headway with Black women, who overwhelmingly voted for Biden in 2020 as well.

‘The biggest takeaway from that event is – again, Byron and I have been really focused on Black men, but there were Black women in that room that raised their hand and stood up and said, ‘Don’t forget about us. I’m a Black woman, I’m voting for President Trump, and I’m fed up with this, too. And I’m not saying you’re going to get as many of us as you are men, but what I am saying is, don’t just cater these events to Black men; cater them to the Black community,’’ the lawmaker said.

A Republican incumbent backed by former President Trump has survived a challenge from the right in her deep-red upstate New York House district.

Rep. Claudia Tenney defeated attorney and businessman Mario Fratto in the Republican primary for New York’s 24th Congressional District. 

Fratto referred to Tenney as a ‘RINO’ (Republican in Name Only) throughout the campaign and accused her of not being conservative enough on various issues, while Tenney tried to paint Fratto as antisemitic and extreme.

This is the second time Tenney and Fratto have faced off in a Republican primary for the district. The two clashed in 2022, with Tenney securing just under 54% of the vote to Fratto’s 40%.

Tenney’s win means she has likely secured a fourth term in the House of Representatives, given the conservative leanings of her district.

She was first elected in 2016 to represent New York’s 22nd Congressional District, but she narrowly lost her 2018 re-election bid in a tough year for Republicans. She was re-elected in 2020 to again represent the 22nd District, but after redistricting across the state, she successfully ran for the 24th District in 2022.

Elections analysts rate the race as either ‘solid’ or ‘safe’ Republican.

The House of Representatives is expected to pass a bill on Tuesday aimed at blocking countries that receive U.S. foreign aid from sending money to the Taliban.

Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., introduced his No Tax Dollars for the Taliban Act late last year. If passed, it would force the State Department to report out which countries give aid to the Taliban – which has ruled Afghanistan since 2021 – that also get U.S. assistance.

It would also force the secretary of state to weigh if those countries should keep getting American dollars and develop a strategy to discourage them from continuing aid to the Taliban.

‘It’s just obscene that any money would get to the Taliban,’ Burchett told Fox News Digital in an interview on Tuesday. ‘We are $35 trillion in debt and do not need to be funding our enemies one bit.’

He argued that foreign cash being funneled to the Taliban is, in effect, wasting U.S. taxpayer dollars.

Burchett, the vice chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s subcommittee on the Middle East, also accused the State Department of being deliberately vague about how many federal dollars total have gone to the Taliban.

‘If this was an oversight of them, funding our enemies, that just tells you they have zero management and zero quality control at all, they don’t know what’s going on,’ Burchett said. ‘They obviously – somebody knows what’s going on, and those people need to be out.’

Since the Taliban took over Afghanistan nearly three years ago, the U.S. has provided over $2.8 billion to address the humanitarian crisis there, according to a Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) report released in May.

Republican national security hawks were outraged, arguing that at least some of that funding likely fell into the Taliban’s hands.

‘It is unacceptable for any U.S. funding to benefit the Taliban. The Biden administration must take immediate action to prevent U.S. taxpayer dollars from going to the Taliban,’ House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, said at the time.

House GOP leaders are putting the bill up for a vote under suspension of the rules, which is generally referred for noncontroversial legislation that’s expected to get bipartisan support.

Fox News Digital reached out to the State Department for comment on the bill and Burchett’s accusations.

Former President Obama is again stepping in to help lock up votes and dollars during the home stretch of President Biden’s quest for the White House, apparently having ditched the concerns that reportedly made Obama wary of Biden’s candidacy in 2020.

Biden’s rematch with former President Trump features a second encore from Obama, whose celebrity and status with Democratic donors has been a financial and public relations boon to Biden at a time when the president is facing increasing questions about his record, plans and cognitive abilities.

‘I take great pride in what the Biden administration has accomplished,’ Obama said during a recent event with Biden and late-night host Jimmy Kimmel at the Peacock Theater in Los Angeles. ‘And it’s a reminder that we don’t have to just vote against something in this election. We have somebody to worry about. And there’s a whole agenda that we should be concerned about.’

He continued, ‘But we can take pride in affirming the extraordinary work that Joe has done. And we want to make sure that we build on that and then pass it on to the next president rather than have a president who wants to reverse the progress that has been made.’

Obama’s comments were part of a ritzy fundraising event at which the Biden campaign pulled in a whopping $30 million as Hollywood stars such as George Clooney and Julia Roberts took the stage in support of the 46th president. The dollar total shattered previous Democratic fundraising records.

Biden is gearing up for a difficult rematch against Trump this year, with polling showing Biden with a two-point advantage over Trump, which is well within the margin of error.

Biden said in April last year that he’d ‘finish the job’ and run for re-election, and the announcement was soon followed by a series of high-profile fundraising events with Hollywood stars, elites at the highest echelons of American society and industry, and notably Obama. 

Obama’s appearance in Los Angeles this month was not the first time his attendance helped bring in millions for Biden. 

The 44th president, as well as former President Bill Clinton, joined Biden at Radio City Music Hall in New York in March for another star-studded fundraiser, this time hosted by actress Mindy Kaling. During the event, late-night host Stephen Colbert moderated a conversation with Biden, Obama and Clinton, while special guests such as Queen Latifah, Lizzo and Ben Platt also appeared.

That event pulled in more than $26 million, according to the campaign at the time. 

Obama has also recorded campaign videos with Biden this election cycle and held conversations with Biden regarding the structure of the campaign heading into 2024, according to various media reports.

Obama’s 2024 fundraising efforts mirror his actions when he stepped in to help boost Biden in 2020, including an $11 million fundraiser that marked the duo’s first such event together since the Obama administration. Obama went on to hit the campaign trail in support of Biden in the leadup to Election Day, which included issuing a scathing assessment of Trump.

‘Trump cares about feeding his ego. Joe cares about keeping you and your family safe,’ Obama said in Flint, Michigan, just days before the 2020 election.

Obama added, ‘He’s still worried about his inauguration crowd being smaller than mine. It really bugs him. He’s still talking about that. Does he have nothing better to worry about? Did no one come to his birthday party as a kid? Was he traumatized?’

But long before joining Biden on the campaign trail – or even endorsing his former running mate – Obama cautioned Biden against seeking the White House, citing fears that the campaign could ‘damage his legacy,’ according to a 2019 New York Times report.

‘You don’t have to do this, Joe, you really don’t,’ Obama reportedly told Biden.

‘Win or lose, they needed to make sure Mr. Biden did not ‘embarrass himself’ or ‘damage his legacy’ during the campaign,’ the New York Times reported, citing two people with knowledge of the conversation.

Obama remained coy for a long while about who he would endorse, saying he would not back anyone during the primary. As Democratic contenders such as Pete Buttigieg, Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Sen. Bernie Sanders dropped out of the primary race and cleared a path for Biden, however, Obama finally endorsed his former veep in August 2020.

Obama said in a video at the time that ‘Joe has all the qualities we need in a president right now,’ noting that choosing him as his running mate in both the 2008 and 2012 elections was ‘one of the best decisions I ever made.’

But even the process by which Obama landed on Biden as his vice presidential pick got off to a rocky start.

Biden made a series of gaffes before becoming Obama’s running mate, including in 2007 when Biden was about to declare his own run for the White House. On the eve of his announcement, Biden described Obama to a reporter as ‘the first mainstream African American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy.’

Despite Biden’s comment, he and Obama soon developed and strengthened their professional relationship, culminating in Biden being selected as Obama’s VP.

Obama could continue bolstering Biden’s campaign this election cycle as recent donation data shows Trump closing his campaign’s fundraising gap with Biden’s campaign. 

Biden previously had a massive fundraising advantage over Trump in the 2024 race for the White House, but recent windfalls following Trump’s conviction in his New York criminal trial have essentially erased Biden’s lead, Fox News Digital reported this weekend. 

Trump and the Republican National Committee in May notched their second consecutive month outraising Biden and the DNC, all while not yet launching a general election ad buy. Biden’s campaign, conversely, has spent at least $65 million on ad purchases.

‘The campaign appreciates President Obama’s help and support,’ a Biden campaign spokesperson told Fox News Digital when reached for comment. 

Presidential debates matter, but not always in the ways that the participants think. Seven years after the first ones, in 1960, Richard Nixon admitted that he felt his lack of proper makeup was a big factor in his losing the 1960 election to JFK. In reality, there was probably no amount of makeup that would have helped Nixon overcome the radiant clarity of his opponent. 

In perhaps the most famous moment of presidential debates, between President Reagan, then age 73, and former Vice President Walter Mondale, Reagan famously said, ‘I want you to know also I will not make age an issue of this campaign. I am not going to exploit, for political purposes, my opponent’s youth and inexperience.’ 

What may easily be overlooked in this seminal moment in debate history is not only the way that Reagan turned a seeming disadvantage into an advantage, but also the charm and humor and ease with which he did so. I am one who always felt Reagan’s acting skills were underrated, and they always served him well as president.

Flash forward to now, and this week’s upcoming CNN Presidential Debate simulcast on Fox Newsbetween former President Donald Trump and current President Joe Biden. If last weekend’s rally in Philadelphia is any indication, where Trump made cognitive comparisons between his unscripted dynamic Teleprompter-free style and Biden’s more wooden, halting manner (Trump also said Biden falls off the stage, etc.), it is clear that Trump intends to use both humor and bluster to attack his opponent directly.

But should President Biden’s or President Trump’s mental acuity or cognitive ability be fair game during the CNN Presidential Debate and what about their respective ages? (Trump is 78, Biden is 81). 

The answer is that mental acuity should be on the docket but not age. Ability and fitness to serve are important in leadership positions but are not always directly proportional to age. Keep in mind that we are talking about the highest office in the land, and that, despite a multitude of presidential advisers, mental alacrity remains at the top of the list when it comes to the rapid decisions necessary to protect this country, especially in a crisis. 

I think that Trump has a point when he says his unscripted articulations speaks to the point of cognitive prowess. When I interviewed him in 2020, he had no notes, did not seek the questions in advance, and in fact it was his complex, nuanced answers that impressed me, far more than his self-proclaimed results of a cognitive test of recall, ‘person, woman, man, camera, TV.’ 

When it comes to President Biden, the concerns come not from age or what the White House says are ‘doctored videos,’ or ‘cheap fakes,’ but more of a sense of increasing hesitancy, periods of confusion or problems of recall where he temporarily forgets the names of leaders including most recently Department of Homeland Security Secretary Mayorkas.

Should a debate be a forum to test cognitive ability and executive function, should the two debaters be able to contest what each other says directly, or should this be a debate in terms of dueling soliloquies only? I think the answer is obvious. We need to see the candidates in sharp contrast, with the more direct the interactions the better. 

President Biden is a good debater, as is former President Trump. President Biden’s last physical a few months ago lists him in excellent physical condition but does not specifically include cognitive testing or an MRI of the brain, and Trump has not recently released such testing either. But a debate is a good forum to assess alacrity, nimbleness, command, wisdom, and yes, even humor and wit. 

Charisma and personality have always influenced voters from the days of Reagan back to JFK, where no amount of makeup could have helped a wooden perspiring Nixon. And then, as now, the voters will decide.